Book contents
- Experiencing the New World of Work
- Experiencing the New World of Work
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Introduction
- Part I Experiencing at Work
- 1 Embodied Inter-Practices in Resonance as New Forms of Working in Organisations
- 2 Wherever I Lay My Laptop, That’s My Workplace
- 3 ‘So Many Cool Things to Do!’
- 4 Experiencing Making
- Part II Digital Platforms and the New World of Work
- Part III Politics, Imaginaries and Others in the New World of Work
- Conclusion
- Afterword
- Index
- References
4 - Experiencing Making
Silence, Atmosphere and Togetherness in Makerspaces
from Part I - Experiencing at Work
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 December 2020
Book contents
- Experiencing the New World of Work
- Experiencing the New World of Work
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Introduction
- Part I Experiencing at Work
- 1 Embodied Inter-Practices in Resonance as New Forms of Working in Organisations
- 2 Wherever I Lay My Laptop, That’s My Workplace
- 3 ‘So Many Cool Things to Do!’
- 4 Experiencing Making
- Part II Digital Platforms and the New World of Work
- Part III Politics, Imaginaries and Others in the New World of Work
- Conclusion
- Afterword
- Index
- References
Summary
Craftsmanship, making and do-it-ocracy are prominent elements of the so-called new world of work. In this chapter, we describe the ‘experience of making’ in two makerspaces, one located in France and the other in the United States. In particular, we focus on three concepts – silence, atmosphere and togetherness – in order to flesh out, or make visible, the specificities of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) and Do-It-Together (DIT) processes in makerspaces. We mobilise Merleau-Ponty’s work and an aesthetic perspective on time and place to delve into the experience of making. This leads us to propose the concept of New Collaborative Experiences (NCE), which we define as new modes of feeling and expressing the self and the world in a context that requires a collective production and coordination, as a way of illuminating our two ethnographic accounts.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Experiencing the New World of Work , pp. 84 - 106Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Aroles, J., Mitev, N. & de Vaujany, F. X. 2019. Mapping themes in the study of new work practices. New Technology, Work and Employment, 34(3): 285–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beyes, T. 2016. Art, Aesthetics and Organization. In Czarniawska, B. (ed.) A Research Agenda for Management and Organization Studies. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 115–125.Google Scholar
Bigo, V. 2018. On silence, creativity and ethics in organization studies. Organization Studies, 39(1): 121–133.Google Scholar
Blackman, D. & Sadler-Smith, E. 2009. The silent and the silenced in organizational knowing and learning. Management Learning, 40(5): 569–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borch, C. 2009. Organizational atmospheres: Foam, affect and architecture. Organization, 17(2): 223–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouncken, R. B. & Reusch, A. J. 2018. Coworking-spaces: How a phenomenon of the sharing economy builds a novel trend for the workplace and for entrepreneurship. Review of Managerial Science, 12(1): 317–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Böhme, G. 1993. Atmosphere as the fundamental concept of a new aesthetics. Thesis Eleven, 36(1): 113–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinsfield, C. 2014. Employee Voice and Silence ln Organizational Behaviour. In Wilkinson, A., Donaghey, J., Dundon, T. and Freeman, R. B. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Employee Voice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 114–131.Google Scholar
Brown, A. D. & Coupland, C. 2005. Sounds of silence: Graduate trainees, hegemony and resistance. Organization Studies, 26(7): 1049–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costas, J. & Grey, C. 2014. Bringing secrecy into the open: Towards a theorization of the social processes of organizational secrecy. Organization Studies, 35(10): 1423–1447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale, K. 2005. Building a social materiality: Spatial and embodied politics in organizational control. Organization, 12(5): 649–678.Google Scholar
Davies, S. R. 2017. Characterizing hacking: Mundane engagement in US hacker and makerspaces. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 43(2): 171–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Vaujany, F. X. & Aroles, J. 2019. Nothing happened, something happened: Silence in a makerspace. Management Learning, 50(2): 208–225.Google Scholar
De Vaujany, F. X. & Vaast, E. 2016. Matters of visuality in legitimation practices: Dual iconographies in a meeting room. Organization, 23(5): 763–790.Google Scholar
De Vaujany, F. X., Aroles, J. & Laniray, P. 2019. Towards a political philosophy of management: Performativity & visibility in management practices. Philosophy of Management, 18(2): 117-129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Vaujany, F. X., Dandoy, A., Grandazzi, A. & Faure, S. 2019. Experiencing a new place as an atmosphere: A focus on tours of collaborative spaces. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 35(2): 101030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, L. E., Spreitzer, G. M. & Bacevice, P. A. 2017. Co-constructing a sense of community at work: The emergence of community in coworking spaces. Organization Studies, 38(6): 821–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffero, T. 2017. Quasi-things: The Paradigm of Atmospheres. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Grint, K. 2010. The sacred in leadership: Separation, sacrifice and silence. Organization Studies, 31(1): 89–107.Google Scholar
Kirrane, M., O'Shea, D., Buckley, F., Grazi, A. & Prout, J. 2017. Investigating the role of discrete emotions in silence versus speaking up. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 90(3): 354–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Küpers, W. 2002. Phenomenology of aesthetic organising: Ways towards aesthetically responsive organizations. Consumption, Markets and Culture, 5(1): 21–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Küpers, W. 2014. Phenomenology of the Embodied Organization: The Contribution of Merleau-Ponty for Organizational Studies and Practice. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Law, J. 2004. After Method: Mess in Social Sciences Research. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefort, C. 2010. Foreword. In: Institution and Passivity. Course Notes from the Collège de France (1954–1955). Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Mazis, G. A. 2016. Merleau-Ponty and the Face of the World: Silence, Ethics, Imagination, and Poetic Ontology. New York: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1945, 2013. Phénoménologie de la perception. Paris: Gallimard.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1964. Le visible et l'invisible: suivi de notes de travail. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 2010. Institution and Passivity. Course Notes from the Collège de France (1954–1955). Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Michels, C. 2015. Researching affective atmospheres. Geographica Helvetica, 70(4): 255–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pallasmaa, J. 2014. Space, place and atmosphere. Emotion and peripherical perception in architectural experience. Lebenswelt. Aesthetics and Philosophy of Experience, 1934(4): 230–245.Google Scholar
Spinuzzi, C. 2012. Working alone together: Coworking as emergent collaborative activity. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 26(4): 399–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strati, A. 2009. ‘Do You Do Beautiful Things?’: Aesthetics and Art in Qualitative Methods of Organization Studies. In Buchanan, D. A. and Bryman, A. (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Research Methods. SAGE, 230–245.Google Scholar
Sundararajan, A. 2017. The Sharing Economy: The End of Employment and the Rise of Crowd-based Capitalism. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Willems, T. 2018. Seeing and sensing the railways: A phenomenological view on practice-based learning. Management Learning, 49(1): 23–39.Google Scholar
Yakhlef, A. 2010. The corporeality of practice-based learning. Organization Studies, 31(4): 409–430.Google Scholar
- 3
- Cited by